Derek B Posted October 27, 2020 Share Posted October 27, 2020 (edited) On 10/26/2020 at 12:02 AM, Anthony in NZ said: Thanks Kev! Thanks Al, I just favor the route of less filling where I can...however on this build I have used more CA than ever LOL Question What is wrong with the Tamiya Nose that I need this https://www.djparkins.com/product.php?productid=17694 Kit nose....I am no expert on Phantoms, I need your assistance with this one? The kit one seems just fine, or am I missing something here?? Cheers Anthony Hi Anthony, I have just done some rough calculations based upon the MDD F-4K GA drawings. The radome break to the end of the tailplane/chute tail cone is 57 ft 7.1 inch. The tail cone to radome break/hinge point is 51 ft 10 inch. This is approximately 67 inches (or perhaps fractionally more), or 5 ft 7 inches (1.7 m) for the radome length). In 1/32 scale, this comes out at approximately 53.2 mm, so, the length of your kit radome should be somewhere in this parish? (I do not know what the F-4J radome is, but I would have expected that it would be similar or the same?). Another LSP member has pointed out to me that the Tamiya kit radome cone is a little too long in length in length (probably to make up for a fractionaly short fuselage length?) and slightly too 'rounded' at the top curvature when viewed from a side profile. It may be possible to correct the kit part by reducing the length of the kit at the radome joint (although this still leaves a slight too short fuselage, if the overall length is correct with the kit radome in place, you could alternatively re-scribe the break slightly forward of the kit one?) and sanding the top of it to make it a little flatter - if there is enough plastic wall thickness to allow this. I do not know if there are any other errors with the kit radome (I have not looked at its shape from a plan view), but I am certain that you will prevail whatever the outcome! The illustration below (thanks to SCJH) may explain things a little more clearly. What we see here is a side profile shot of the Tamiya 1/32 F-4C kit with the MDD F-4K forward aircraft section superimposed upon it - it shows the radome profile and relative break line station location (which is canted forward by 2 degrees). Interestingly, this drawing scales out the radome length as 75.38 inches (or approx. 59.83 mm in 1/32 scale), so I am not quite certain where the 6.63 mm difference is when measured against the MDD F-4K aircraft GA drawings which earlier gave a scale radome length of 53.2 mm? (maybe different frame stations were used as datum points?). Cheers Derek Edited January 7 by Derek B D.B. Andrus, Paulpk, Greg W and 1 other 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony in NZ Posted October 27, 2020 Author Share Posted October 27, 2020 11 hours ago, AlbertD said: No worries about over posting. Even if were not building a Brit Phantom we are all learning some great techniques. Thanks Al, appreciate that buddy. I am hoping to make it a good resource on Brit Phantoms as well as there is just soooo much info on them scattered all over the 'net' and I am trying to bring it all together with this build 8 hours ago, Starfighter said: There is no such thing as "too many posts" ot "too many photos", Anthony! Thanks Ben...I know I think that whenever I see one of your builds, I always look forward to them! Cheers Anthony AlbertD, Derek B and Starfighter 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony in NZ Posted October 27, 2020 Author Share Posted October 27, 2020 7 hours ago, Derek B said: Hi Anthony, I have just done some rough calculations based upon the MDD F-4K GA drawings. The radome break to the end of the tailplane/chute tail cone is 57 ft 7.1 inch. The tail cone to radome break/hinge point is 51 ft 10 inch. This is approximately 67 inches (or perhaps fractionally more), or 5 ft 7 inches (1.7 m) for the radome length). In 1/32 scale, this comes out at approximately 53.2 mm, so, the length of your kit radome should be somewhere in this parish? (I do not know what the F-4J radome, but I would have expected that it would be similar or the same?). Another LSP member has pointed out to me that the Tamiya kit radome cone is a little too long in length in length (probably to make up for a fractionaly short fuselage length?) and slightly too 'rounded' at the top curvature when viewed from a side profile. It may be possible to correct the kit part by reducing the length of the kit the back (although this still leaves a slight too short fuselage, although, if the overall length is correct with the kit radome in place, you could alternatively re-scribe the break slightly forward of the kit one?) and sanding the top of it to make it a little flatter (if there is enough plastic wall thickness to allow this). I do not know if there are any other errors with the kit radome (I have not looked at its shape from a plan view), but I am certain that you will prevail whatever the outcome! The illustration below (thanks to SCJH) may explain things a little more clearly. What we see here is a side profile shot of the Tamiya 1/32 F-4C kit with the MDD F-4K forward aircraft section superimposed upon it - it shows the radome profile and relative break line station location (which is canted forward by 2 degrees). Interestingly, this drawing scales out the radome length as 75.38 inches (or approx. 59.83 mm in 1/32 scale), so I am not quite certain where the 6.63 mm difference is when measured against the MDD F-4K aircraft GA drawings which earlier gave a scale radome length of 53.2 mm? (maybe different frame stations were used as datum points?). Cheers Derek Hmmm, now Derek, this is an awesome post. Just got up and getting ready for work, but on initial investigation I can see the issue...just. Not so much at the top, but definitely at the lower profile. I will look some more into it tonight, but I think it's something I could have fixed myself....oh well as least I wont need nose weight! Great information buddy...you really came through! Cheers Anthony Derek B 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rainer Hoffmann Posted October 27, 2020 Share Posted October 27, 2020 Quote Sorry for the overposting, but I am trying to show as much info as I can to those building a Brit Phantom in any scale Cheers Anthony Overposting? What is that? No, honestly, this is really enlightening and there is no such thing as too much Phantom stuff. Cheers Rainer Derek B and Anthony in NZ 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony in NZ Posted October 27, 2020 Author Share Posted October 27, 2020 12 minutes ago, Rainer Hoffmann said: Overposting? What is that? No, honestly, this is really enlightening and there is no such thing as too much Phantom stuff. Cheers Rainer Thanks Rainer. And I am loving seeing your amazing Viggen on the bench again! Ok quick post before I go to work. I grabbed this pic off the net by Ian Black who took this of 'Black Mike' FG.1 You can really see the lower line shape, and when I pose my model next to this photo I can see I need to deepen that nose and sand a little off the top. I will see how the resin nose addresses the issue as well, but it seems I need to blend it back into the lower fuse more as it just dosent 'get fixed' by replacing the radome..... Cheers Anthony Rainer Hoffmann, Marcel111, Starfighter and 3 others 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek B Posted October 27, 2020 Share Posted October 27, 2020 58 minutes ago, Anthony in NZ said: Thanks Rainer. And I am loving seeing your amazing Viggen on the bench again! Ok quick post before I go to work. I grabbed this pic off the net by Ian Black who took this of 'Black Mike' FG.1 You can really see the lower line shape, and when I pose my model next to this photo I can see I need to deepen that nose and sand a little off the top. I will see how the resin nose addresses the issue as well, but it seems I need to blend it back into the lower fuse more as it just dosent 'get fixed' by replacing the radome..... Cheers Anthony Pity that you can't simply rotate the radome 180 degrees! Derek Anthony in NZ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jenshb Posted October 27, 2020 Share Posted October 27, 2020 Could you superimpose the drawing over a similar photo of the real thing to verify the correctness of the outlines? A golden rule of engineering drawings is to never measure anything off a drawing, but always follow the dimensions written on it. In pre-CAD times, the contours and shapes didn't have to be accurate as the dimensions were to be followed. With CAD, the contours should now be accurate as dimensions follow the 2D drawing which is generated by the 3D model. However, dimensions can still be overridden, so the golden rule still applies. Jens Anthony in NZ and Derek B 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek B Posted October 27, 2020 Share Posted October 27, 2020 28 minutes ago, jenshb said: Could you superimpose the drawing over a similar photo of the real thing to verify the correctness of the outlines? A golden rule of engineering drawings is to never measure anything off a drawing, but always follow the dimensions written on it. In pre-CAD times, the contours and shapes didn't have to be accurate as the dimensions were to be followed. With CAD, the contours should now be accurate as dimensions follow the 2D drawing which is generated by the 3D model. However, dimensions can still be overridden, so the golden rule still applies. Jens Very true Jens - I also work to dimensions for the same reason (I know that GA drawings are little more than a general outline of the aircraft and that even good side view photographs of an aircraft could present lens errors). I did not produce the overlay, LSP member scjh did, but it would be worth seeing it. Regards Derek Anthony in NZ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John1 Posted October 27, 2020 Share Posted October 27, 2020 15 hours ago, Anthony in NZ said: Sorry for the overposting, but I am trying to show as much info as I can to those building a Brit Phantom in any scale Cheers Anthony You have nothing to worry about. I love builds like this. You learn about the actual aircraft, not just how to assemble and paint a plastic model. Keep it coming! Anthony in NZ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jenshb Posted October 27, 2020 Share Posted October 27, 2020 1 hour ago, Derek B said: Very true Jens - I also work to dimensions for the same reason (I know that GA drawings are little more than a general outline of the aircraft and that even good side view photographs of an aircraft could present lens errors). I did not produce the overlay, LSP member scjh did, but it would be worth seeing it. Regards Derek Jumpei Temma has some drawings on his website that appear to be very accurate and he also compared one of his drawings to a sideview taken with a telephoto lens. Might be worth asking scjh to overlay the drawing on that photo or Mr Temma's drawings to see how they compare. Anthony in NZ, Kagemusha and Derek B 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony in NZ Posted October 28, 2020 Author Share Posted October 28, 2020 Well, you guys sure have been busy whilst I was at work today! I will have to sit down with a cuppa after dinner and read all of this properly Thanks for everyones input, this is what makes this hobby so great! I am learning so much about the Phantom (especially Brit ones) it's not funny.....sometimes, it is actually 'not funny' as it means more work for me! Cheers Anthony Derek B 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cees Broere Posted October 28, 2020 Share Posted October 28, 2020 Remember modelling is fun Anthony. Kagemusha, Derek B and Anthony in NZ 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phantomdriver Posted October 28, 2020 Share Posted October 28, 2020 One point before it gets done... Does this conversion include the Y tail fuel dump , peculiar only to the Spey version? Derek B 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony in NZ Posted October 28, 2020 Author Share Posted October 28, 2020 11 minutes ago, Cees Broere said: Remember modelling is fun Anthony. LOL, that's what I am telling myself..... 6 minutes ago, phantomdriver said: One point before it gets done... Does this conversion include the Y tail fuel dump , peculiar only to the Spey version? Sure will, thanks for being onto it with the Brit mods....10/10! Nice to know you guys are onto me! Derek B 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek B Posted October 28, 2020 Share Posted October 28, 2020 4 hours ago, Anthony in NZ said: Well, you guys sure have been busy whilst I was at work today! I will have to sit down with a cuppa after dinner and read all of this properly Thanks for everyones input, this is what makes this hobby so great! I am learning so much about the Phantom (especially Brit ones) it's not funny.....sometimes, it is actually 'not funny' as it means more work for me! Cheers Anthony I know Anthony, I am also still learning about this beast myself! I've started looking into the radome length issue more closely now simply because I want to know what is correct! Between two dimensioned MDD F-4K drawings, there is a difference between the overall aircraft length and the radome line break dimensions of approximately 7 inches, which may equate to a frame (station) spacing. I am aware that the F-4K was required to have a hinged radome in order to provide RN carrier platform lift clearance. I do not know if the standard F-4J aircraft has a similar arrangement or not, but if it doesn't (i.e. the radome is simply bolted straight onto the radar bulkhead), then it is possible that the F-4K was modified in this area and that could account for the F-4K airframe station break anomalies? Derek Kais and Anthony in NZ 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now